rupture 
If there is one lesson from the unsuccessful prohibition period of the 1920s, it is we, the people, will go to great lengths to exercise our right to drink alcohol in the company of others. Our ancestors could have determined just received a small batch brew bath in the comfort of their home, but instead they set up a system of secret places to gather and eat together, even under threat of federal prosecution . Although no longer a crime to consume alcohol, New Yorkers are always pushing the limits of legal drinking with others, defying the open container laws banning public consumption.
Drinking is a leisure activity. It is a way to go beyond the realm of normal perception and see things differently, in the metaphorical sense (though sometimes a literal). It is an act of leisure and rest, parallel to peering through a park bench. In New York, as in most of the United States, it is illegal for anyone to possess an open container of an alcoholic beverage in a public place, "except for a block party, feast or similar function to which a permit has been obtained. "It is rare that people have the resources for a block party or used for a large-scale public celebration. More likely, they simply seek to crack open a box with neighbors on their markets or with friends in Central . Park and enjoying a drink in one of the most dynamic and diverse public spheres of the country for a simple penance Unfortunately, it is not a legal option even outer space we have is not fully open to our discretionary use: . a resident can not drink on its own steps because it is "a place where the public or a substantial group of persons has access."
Open container laws relegate social drinking in private spaces that must be accessible for a fee, which limits our interaction with the city. Yet citizens subvert this mandate, disguising their open containers or drinking shamelessly on their stoops. In 09, a Brooklyn resident Kimber Vanry challenged a public drinking citation he received to indulge in a beer on its steps. The charge was eventually dismissed after multiple court proceedings. "These laws all want to drive us into private areas that most people can not afford or have access to," protested Vanry. "If you want to enjoy a summer night with a drink, you have to pay."
As Jane Jacobs noted in The Death and Life of Great American Cities , the diversity of a city is giving it the potential to life people with various interests and organizations to address is what activates a city and gave the floor to the disparate interests of its residents public space is the most egalitarian of kingdoms .. free to be used by all. Since it does not restrict the entrance, it welcomes a chance encounter between a woman living in a shelter and a suit of Wall Street, or a senator and a professional dog walker. Private, conversely, exclude, at the owner's discretion "the. public domain is what we own and control," noted New York architect Alexander Garvin. "streets, squares, parks, infrastructure and public buildings constitute the fundamental element in any community - the framework around which everything else grows. " While Garvin emphasizes that access to public space is essential to the construction of the community, we must question the control element. While some activities are limited in our collective spaces and this restriction is routinely subverted in protest, which controls? Are we in control of the space as populated or is the space controlled by an authority which is in contradiction with public opinion?
Michael Sorkin compares ban open containers in public spaces in the city walls, which puts limits on its use potential. "If the container is a cover against accidental or uncontrolled contamination, middle and handling control, the appeal against such degrading notion of space is in the fight for intimate spaces, plural and malleable spaces in which differences are invented and celebrated. "in establishing limits is the implicit desire to separate the two entities, thus eliminating the potential for unexpected encounters. When we limit private areas of social drinking with edges defined as doors, walls and doors, who is and who is left out?
often allowed to drink in public must be purchased. Only many people can physically packaged in a bar, not to mention the law. These revelers rent their allocated four square feet in smaller increments up paying much more for a drink than they would in a grocery store. it costs $ 1.50 when pulled from a refrigerator costs $ 6.00 bodega drawn from a tap and garnished with a slice of collective conversation. The price of drink in a private establishment is also effective in screening people from different classes that are physical barriers between a sidewalk cafe in the street.
The spaces designated for drinking in the view of the street to capitalize on the shared visual experience through the same obstacles that prevent people encroaching on private space. They offer the charm of the flâneur mentioned by Walter Benjamin, allowing brunchers to see and be seen on the edge of a bottomless mimosas. In some cases, the walls all bars and cafes, but dissolve, folding and opening to bring in external activity. As the solution of the protagonist duo in "A Night at the Roxbury," there is an attempt to remove the boundaries that prevent some participants wishing to enter. Although all the contributors to the life of the city are allowed to participate in this visual exchange, only the one who pays is allowed to wander. The appointment of a separate physical space prevents the transfer of understanding through shared experience that could facilitate social consumption otherwise.
There are those who must remain resolutely outside the boundaries where social drinking is legal because they can not buy legally. Persons wishing to consume alcohol in society, but do not have access to housing or sustainable homeless and poorest income must do so in public. These people are more likely to be discovered and branded as deviant or not brown bag.
The law provides that a person found defying the order may incur a $ 25 citation or five days in jail. Those who have a clean record and an extra $ 25 on the hand can be regarded as a mere nuisance, and warn customers of a $ 25 cover charge for Prospect Park Sunday picnic. Others may be unfairly targeted for the same activity, or, as recently suggested by a judge in Brooklyn, just because they belong to a racial minority. In 2012, Judge Noach Dear decided to fight against the tendency of the city at the public drinking citations against its inhabitants, saying that the application has tended to target minorities. After reviewing the value of public-documented drinking citations issued in Brooklyn a month, his staff found that 85 percent of subpoenas were issued to individuals classified as blacks and Latinos, while only 4 percent been issued to whites.
For many of us, the city parks are our backyards substitute. They are the recreational area, a shared retirement from the continuous flow of movement that dominates the city. On these greens, glorious grass, one can legally barbecue or sunbathe topless, but can not open a bottle of chardonnay. pastoral vision of Olmsted Central and Prospect Parks probably did not include the folding twenty plastic cups of wine, but one can hardly argue for the sanctity of his vision. People have long sullied its hilly streets with their carts and playing kickball and organized softball. This, too, is an affirmation of the right to use our public space we want, even if a higher authority (the bearded father of landscape architecture) would limit its use.
The ability to walk on the town with an open beer in hand benefits the likes of Seoul, Paris and New Orleans. Instead dissolve following debauchery, these cities offer an active public life. People gather at the river, the bridges on foot, and parks to share conversation, space, and a bottle of wine. When the sun sets in New York, we drift away from rivers, gather inside when the coveted backyards overflow and spill our pockets for some drinks. This prevents us from experiencing all that the city has to offer, especially when the air is thin and free of the cold polar vortex. If it is warm enough to throw out without a shirt full protection of the law, it is hot enough to drink in the park. There, we should be allowed to enjoy the city and the presence of its inhabitants, regardless of race or income for the lowest cost.
Posting Komentar